A6-5357M vs A9-9410

VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9410
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.99
+30.3%

A9-9410 outperforms A6-5357M by a substantial 30% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9410 and A6-5357M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24882664
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeAMD A-Series
Power efficiency6.021.98
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Richland (2013−2014)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)1 June 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A9-9410 and A6-5357M basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed2.9 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz3.5 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size125 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °C71 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A9-9410 and A6-5357M compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFP4FP2
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9410 and A6-5357M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsVirtualization,86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9410 and A6-5357M are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9410 and A6-5357M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2133DDR3
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R5 GraphicsAMD Radeon HD 8450G
iGPU core count3no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A9-9410 and A6-5357M integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A9-9410 and A6-5357M integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9410 and A6-5357M.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes8no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A9-9410 0.99
+30.3%
A6-5357M 0.76

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

A9-9410 1522
+30.6%
A6-5357M 1165

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.99 0.76
Recency 31 May 2016 1 June 2013
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

A9-9410 has a 30.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The A9-9410 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-5357M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9410 and A6-5357M, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A9-9410
A9-9410
AMD A6-5357M
A6-5357M

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.8 113 votes

Rate A9-9410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 6 votes

Rate A6-5357M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9410 or A6-5357M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.